Commission Agendas | previous page
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Tuesday, November 3, 1998; 1:30 P.M.
State Capitol Building, Room 412
Pierre, South Dakota
NOTE: If you wish to join this meeting by conference call, please contact the Commission at 605- 773-3201 by 5:00 p.m. on November 2, 1998.
NOTE: Notice is further given to persons with disabilities that this Commission meeting is being held in a physically accessible place. If you have special needs, please notify the Commission and we will make all necessary arrangements.
Administration
1. Approval Of The Minutes Of The Commission Meetings Held On October 15, 20 and 27, 1998. (Staff: Shirleen Fugitt.)
Consumer Affairs1. Status Report On Consumer Utility Inquiries And Complaints Recently Received By The Commission. (Consumer Affairs: Leni Healy.)
The Commission has received 2866 consumer contacts during 1998. 167 contacts have been received since the October 15, 1998, Commission meeting.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS: 144 of the contacts involved telecommunication issues. 38 contacts involved the unauthorized switching of long distance service; 18 contacts involved billing issues; 13 contacts involved telemarketers; 10 contacts did not receive service as promised; 8 contacts reported being charged higher rates than promised; 6 contacts involved the unauthorized billing for services; 6 contacts were listed as "other"; 4 contacts involved pay phone issues; 4 contacts concerned charges; 4 contacts involved untimely transfers; 4 contacts involved disconnections; 3 contacts concerned cellular phones; 3 contacts involved installation fees; 2 contacts involved poor service; 2 contacts concerned repair; 2 contacts involved discrimination; 2 contacts involved fees; 2 contacts involved leased equipment; 2 contacts involved Lifeline/LinkUp issues; and the remaining issues concerned access, "no use" fees, calling card rates, construction, credit, directory, Internet, rates, sales tax, and upgrade.
ELECTRICITY: 16 contacts involving electricity were reported. 7 disconnections were reported; 3 billing issued were addressed; 2 contacts involved outages; and the remaining issues involved meter error, pole placement, wrong rate, and estimated reading.
NATURAL GAS: 7 contacts involving natural gas were reported. 4 contacts involved disconnections; 2 contacts involved billing; and 1 contact involved a high bill.
A total of 1354 complaints have been resolved informally during 1998.
TelecommunicationsOn September 4, 1998, U S WEST Communications, Inc. filed a supplemental brief in support of its proposed interconnection agreement language. AT&T also filed a brief regarding the disputed issues. Also on September 4, 1998, AT&T filed an emergency motion for implementation of previous Commission orders or of undisputed portions of the interconnection agreement. In addition, both companies are requesting a Commission ruling on the disputed issues. The Commission denied AT&T's motion and set a hearing for November 17-19, 1998. On October 20, 1998, AT&T filed a motion requesting expedited access to U S WEST's telecommunications facilities for local interconnection.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant AT&T's motion?
On February 25, 1998, Dakota Telecom, Inc. and Dakota Telecommunications Systems, Inc. filed a petition to utilize, in its entirety, the negotiated agreement between Sprint Communications Company, L.P. and U S WEST Communications, Inc. which was filed for approval with the Commission on August 27, 1997, and which was approved by the Commission, subject to minor revisions, on November 18, 1997.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed?
On April 29, 1998, Western Telephone Company filed its Switched Access Revenue Requirement. Western Telephone Company filed a switched access cost study developing a revenue requirement that is included in the revenue requirement used to determine the switched access rates for the Local Exchange Carrier Association. No parties filed to intervene.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On May 15, 1998, the Commission received a request from U S WEST Communications, Inc. for approval of the negotiated Agreement for Service Resale between U S WEST Communications, Inc. and Comm South Companies, Inc. On October 26, 1998, Comm South requested to withdraw the filing.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant the withdrawal and close the docket?
On May 19, 1998, the Commission received a complaint from Douglas Pettigrew, Wetonka, SD, against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding service problems. "For years we have had problems with loss of service for hours to days in duration. The lack of service often had to wait over the weekend after being reported to be repaired. Disruption of service occurs throughout the year but most often during the winter months or during stormy weather. In October 1997, we purchased a FAX machine for personal and business use. On some occasions faxes are sent without problem. At least 50-60% of the time, we are unable to send a fax due to 'line error.' On some occasions, we try 3-4 times before a message is faxed and on other occasions, we may have to wait a period of time before attempting again. From reports from our neighbors, our area is unable to successfully have the Caller ID feature. This is something we would like to obtain but are unable due to the problems. In addition, we would like to purchase another computer in the future and have access to E-mail and the Internet. But again, this service is not possible for phone customers in our area. Our telephone service provider has been lacking for years in just providing basic, dependable, consistent service. We are paying for services we do not receive and, in addition, do not have the capability of receiving services or features that practically all subscribers have." The complainant requested the following relief: "I feel U S WEST Communications needs to replace the archaic system in our area as soon as possible to meet basic and future needs. We have paid for a service for years which we are not receiving and which is not meeting the subscribers' needs. Moreover, repeated problems have not been solved- -only fixed temporarily." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until later this year.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On June 29, 1998, Don and Jenny Malsom, Mina, SD, filed a complaint against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding updating lines. The problem with the telephone line goes "back at least 10" years. The sheriff's office receives 911 calls from their location when none were dialed, noise on the line is reported to U S WEST and when the repairman checks the line it is okay, Caller ID does not work, and calls can not "get thru to us." What do you think the Commission should do to solve this problem? "We are told we need new telephone lines - our equipment is too outdated - we request modern equipment like all others are on." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On July 7, 1998, Paul Malsom, Mina, SD, filed a complaint against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding updating lines. "My complaint is toward U S WEST Communications. I am no longer a customer of U S WEST. My telephone service is with McLeodUSA. The problem is McLeodUSA just rents the telephone line from U S WEST. U S WEST does all of the repairs and service work on the lines and switch boards. My problems have been occurring for approximately ten years. My phone is out of service quite often. I lose my service almost once a month. Moisture seems to be the biggest problem. When the phone is out, it usually is two days before service is restored. Recently my phone will ring once, then stop. When you pick up the phone, nobody is there. This occurs sometimes often during the day or night. My phone almost always has some static in the background. I am an internet customer also. When the static is high, I cannot connect. Also the static disconnects me quite often. As a farmer, the internet is very important to my business. I use the internet to keep track of markets and weather conditions. I am also concerned about what would happen in case of a farm accident or an emergency. We live 25 miles from the nearest hospital. If our phone is out, we have no way to contact emergency help. Usually when our phone is out, the neighbors' is also out of service. From what I understand, my phone system is outdated. The lines' insulation is also brittle and weathered. The system that I have is not capable of caller ID. I feel if other customers in our area can get that option, I should also be able to." The complainant requested the following relief: "I think U S WEST should update our phone system. Whatever it takes to solve our phone problems and make it more reliable. Possibly new lines and new switching systems. We are still on an old party line type system." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On July 10, 1998, Dale and Linda Brooks, Mina, SD, filed a complaint against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding updating lines. "Lack of and poor telephone service in the Mina, South Dakota area." The complainants request the following relief: "The P.U.C. should get on U S WEST and not allow any rate increases until we have the same services that are available to residents of Aberdeen." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On July 15, 1998, Marian C. Brooks, Mina, SD, filed a complaint against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding updating lines. "We have had phone problems for years" in the Mina, South Dakota area. The complainant requests the following relief: "You know the answer to that better than I do." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
REGARDING UPDATING LINES. (Consumer Representative: Leni Healy. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On July 24, 1998, Brent and Dawn Barton, Mina, SD, filed a complaint against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding updating lines. "We have lived in this area for 14 years and had problems for several years...we don't have a phone for 2-3 days at a time. ...when the phone is working, there's so much static you can't hear the person talking." The complainant requested the following relief: "U S WEST needs to put in new phone lines. Also, to be compensated for the many years of problems with our phone lines, by the phone company." The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On August 3, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by Dwayne Blomster, against U S WEST regarding updating lines. The complaint alleges: outdated lines and equipment; unable to make use of full computer services; static and noise on the lines; frequently out of phone services; and, poor and slow e-mail service. The complainant is asking for updated lines and service as quickly as possible with less trouble and better service. The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On August 13, 1998, the Commission received a complaint from Mike Malsom, Mina, SD, regarding poor telephone service in the Mina, SD area. The complainant explains having telephone problems for years and is asking that the system be updated. The Commission found probable cause and deferred action until October 31, 1998.
TODAY, staff has an update. And, if the work is complete, shall the Commission close the docket?
On September 4, 1998, the Commission received an interconnection agreement between the City of Hawarden, Iowa and Heartland Telecommunications Company of Iowa.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed?
On September 22, 1998, the Commission received an application by PremierCom, Inc. for a Certificate of Authority to provide intrastate, interexchange switched inbound, switched outbound, and calling card services on a resale basis.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate of Authority to PremierCom, Inc.?
On October 14, 1998, the Commission received an application of Megsinet-CLEC, Inc. for a Certificate of Authority to provide inbound and outbound telecommunications services to residential and business customers utilizing switched access. Switched access service is available on a presubscription basis from equal access originating end offices. Megsinet also offers travel card services. All services are available twenty-four hours per day, seven days a week. Service is offered as an add-on to Megsinet's interstate service.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate of Authority to Megsinet-CLEC, Inc.?
On October 8, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by Sheryl L. Klein against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding poor service. The Complainant outlines a series of service outages, repair difficulties, outdated service and staffing issues. The Complainant seeks the following relief: "We want the line fixed completely and permanently, so it functions at a 100% reliable level. We want this done now, before another winter sets in. We have been told several possible problems by U S West repairmen including aging lines and old systems. We do not know what the solution is, but want it found and implemented now. We ask that U S West be required to make whatever investment is necessary to fully remedy the problem. We also want to be reimbursed for a reasonable amount for the loss of phone service and the associated stress and hassles. We request $500.00.
TODAY, does the Commission find probable cause of an unlawful or unreasonable act, rate, practice or omission to go forward with this complaint and serve it upon the Respondent?
On October 8, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by JoAnn C. Klein against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding poor service The Complainant outlines a series of service outages, repair difficulties, outdated service, phantom calls, and staffing issues. The Complainant seeks the following relief: "contact U S West and insist that our long continuation of poor service and outages be corrected. Also reimbursement or credit for days when phone lines have been out." Mrs. Klein also requests that her billing for 24 directory assistance calls and long distance calls which were not made by the Kleins be credited from their billing.
TODAY, does the Commission find probable cause of an unlawful or unreasonable act, rate, practice or omission to go forward with this complaint and serve it upon the Respondent?
On October 26, 1998, Staff of the Commission petitioned the Commission to issue as Order requiring U S WEST Communications, Inc. to file updates to its Exchange and Network Services Catalog, Access Service Catalog, Advanced Communications Services Catalog and Private Line Transport Services Catalog.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed?
News
PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS RULES
The hearing will be held at 8:30 a.m., on November 2, 1998, in Room 412, State Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota.
You may call 1-800-332-1782 or write to the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, 500 East Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota 57501 to request a copy of the rules or notice.
Announcements- A pre-hearing conference in Docket TC96-184 is scheduled for October 28, 1998, at 9:00 a.m. in Room LCR1 of the State Capitol.
- The hearing for the proposed Telecommunications Rules will be held November 2, 1998, in Room 412 of the Capitol Building.
- Commissioners and Staff will be attending the NARUC meetings in Orlando, FL, November 7-12, 1998.
- A hearing in Docket TC96-184 is scheduled for November 17-19, 1998, in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
- A hearing in Docket TC98-150 is scheduled for December 3, 1998, in Room 412 at 1:30 p.m.
- A hearing in Docket EL98-005 is scheduled for December 15-18, 1998, in the County Commissioner's Meeting Room in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
- A hearing in Docket TC98-146 is scheduled for December 17-18, 1998, in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
- A hearing in Docket NG97-021 is scheduled for January 4-5, 1999, in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
- Commissioners and Staff will be attending the MARC meetings in San Antonio, TX, January 6-10, 1999.
- The next regularly scheduled Commission meeting will be held Wednesday, November 25, 1998, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 412 of the State Capitol Building.
________________
Sue Cichos
Deputy Executive Director
October 27, 1998
